About your Search

20121027
20121104
STATION
CSPAN2 5
COM 4
CNN 3
CNNW 3
MSNBC 3
MSNBCW 3
WHUT (Howard University Television) 2
LANGUAGE
English 29
Search Results 0 to 28 of about 29 (some duplicates have been removed)
this week in the foreign policy debate than all of japan, mexico, or europe? >>> first, my take. the international monetary fund's latest world economic outlook makes for gloomy reading. growth projections have been revised downward almost everywhere, especially in europe and the big emerging markets like china. yet when looking out over the next four years, coincidentally the next presidential term, the imf projects that the united states will be the strongest of the world's rich economies. u.s. growth is forecast to average 3%, much stronger than that was germany or france, at 1.2%, or even canada at 2.3%. increasingly the evidence suggests that the united states has come out of the financial crisis of 2008 in better shape than its peers because of the actions of its government. perhaps the most important cause of america's relative health is the federal reserve. ben bernanke understood the depths of the problem early and responded energetically and creatively. the clearest vindication of his actions has been that the european central bank after charting an opposite course for
" segment. in the final presidential debate, the one on foreign policy, it was interesting it note the countries that got a mention. iran was cited 47 times, of course. israel, 34 times. and china, 32 times. it was also telling, there was only one mention each of europe and africa, and none at all of india. but i was struck by the amount of play one small country got. the one doesn't usually register on washington's foreign policy -- >> mali -- >> mali -- >> with a gdp 1% of mexico. why mali? here's the story briefly. radical islamist groups have taken control of as much as 2/3 of mali's territory, including the historic city of timbuktu. among these groups is al qaeda and the islamic magret, said to have been involved in last month's attack on the consulate in benghazi, libya. together the radical outfits haver to mmted mali. they've destroyed shrines, impose period sahria law and stoned people who come in their wake. now, mali was once considered one of the few stable democracies in africa, and mali's capital would normally have been able to counteract these insurgents. but the g
foreign policy crisis. >> on sunday the israeli government ordered total mobilization. on monday, their armed forces penetrated deeply into egypt and to the vicinity of the suez canal, nearly 100 miles away. and on tuesday, the british and french governments delivered a 12-hour ultimatum to israel and egypt, now followed up by armed attack against egypt. the united states was not consulted in any way about any phase of these actions. nor were we informed of them in advance. >> president eisenhower sounding kind of mad, right? the u.s. had not been informed about the attack ahead of time. because ike had made clear to our allies, to england specifically, that he didn't want another big multi-country conflict in the world. he'd worked with the u.n. to keep that attack from happening. he had made his intentions clear and then england and france just went behind his back and did it anyway and they did it a week before he was facing re-election. >> president dwight d. eisenhower is re-elected to the highest office in the land as world peace faces the greatest crisis since the second w
and republican presidential hopeful mitt romney debated issues of foreign policy and the economy, we turn to world-renowned political dissident, linguist, author, and mit professor noam chomsky. in a recent speech, professor chomsky examined topics largely ignored or glossed over during the campaign -- from china to the arab spring, to global warming and the nuclear threat posed by israel versus iran. he spoke last month at the university of massachusetts in amherst, at any event sponsored by the center for popular economics. his talk was entitled, "who owns the world?" >> when i was thinking about these remarks, i had two topics in mind. i could not decide between them. pretty obvious ones. one topic is, what are the most important issues that we face? the second topic is, what issues are not being treated seriously or at all in the quadrennial frenzy now under way called in election? but i realize that there is no problem. it is not a hard choice. they are the same topic. there are reasons for it, which are very significant in and of themselves. i would like to return to that in a momen
remarks on foreign policy, particularly the challenges facing the new egyptian government in the foreign policy and region security realm, but i can set the concept of talking a little bit about domestic policy. and here, let me just start off by what seems to be a paradoxical situation, when assessing egypt's domestic landscape. because i'm the one hand, on the level of politics we have truly momentous change in egypt. however, on the level of policy, i would argue that we have much more continuity than change. on the level of politics, the election of president mohamed morsi was truly a landmark event in egypt's political history. he was the first civilian elected to the office of the presidency in egypt. he is also the first islamist to be elected as head of state in any arab country in free and fair elections. and that the islamist movement in question of course is the most impressive by far, the largest and most well-established islamist movement in the world of political islam. so truly momentous change on the level of politics. however, i would argue on the level of policy, we hav
was officially the foreign policy debate. unfortunately-- and i do not know this-- that means you have to talk about a lot of other stupid countries. (laughter) and this being boca raton, florida, they hit all the important ones. >> israel is a true friend, it is our greatest ally in the region. >> israel. our closest friend in the region. >> they have to abide by their treaty with israel. >> our ally israel. >> our bond w israel. >> israel. >> israel. >> israel. >> israel. >> israel. >> israel. (laughter) >> stephen: i was playing a drinking game last night where i took a shot of manischewitz every time -- (cheers and applause) every time someone said "israel" and by the end of the debate i was totally diabetic. (laughter) but, folks, this wasn't just about israel it was also about countries that pose a threat to israel. a threat that obama has done nothing to stop. >> we're four years closer to a nuclear iran. we're four years closer to a nuclear iran. >> yes. four years after obama was elected, four whole years have passed. (laughter) the president did nothing to stop the march of time (lau
during the foreign policy debate. by the way, despite that interview with mr. obama, the factor at 8:00 last night beat the nbc program rock center in total audience, which is kind of amazing. getting back to libya. my view is this: muslim terrorists were tracking ambassador stevens. they had heavy weapons at the ready. and saw an opening to attack in benghazi. there is nothing spontaneous about that. the cia was caught napping, then froze when all hell broke loose. apparently not understanding rescue options or what was at stake. when the damage and death became fully known, the obama administration tried to manage it, rather than report it. and so chaos developed. people like u.n. ambassador susan rice, as well as white house spokesperson jay carney did not assess the situation correctly to the public. talking points believes carney and rice were told by the public what to say but by whom? that is the question that brian williams should have asked. because president obama has to know the answer to that it is unconceivable that he doesn't. let me repeat. if you ask president obama
states, let alone with israel, and more open to iran's message of foreign policy independence. what policy elites here ms., is the islamic republic does not need governments to be more pro-iranian. that's not what they need. they just need these governments to be less pro-american, less pro-israel and more independent. but you often hear in washington in particular that the arab awakening means that iran is going to see. it's only arab allies. or as candidate romney says, evidently without looking at a map, iran's only outlet to the sea. this reflects how it is american elite's, not those sitting in tehran here in denial about basic political trends in the middle east, let alone basic geography. by the islamic republic does not believe that serious bashar al-assad will be overthrown by syrians, the key point is that even a post a sovereign government would not be pro-american or pro-israel. and it may even be less seen on keeping the order with israel quiet. and unless a post assad government were taliban like, serious foreign policy will be just fine for the islamic republic. even
copy will not be festooned with all these post-it notes. as well as the politics and foreign policy editor at slate. he goes to the foreign newsmagazine and when he was the managing editor of foreign policy magazine counted twice won the award for general excellence, which i can tell you with a good feat in itself and particularly impressive given that foreign policy is a relatively small circulation journal, not a deep-pocketed magazines like "vanity fair" or "esquire." both articles and essays have appeared in "the new york times," "washington post" and "wall street journal" and his provide analysis for abc, cnn, msnbc and npr. he's in washington d.c. her very happy to have them with us here today. [applause] the dictators learning curve is a look at an arms race, speaking metaphorically that dictators and democratic activist trying to overthrow and both sides have had to up their game in recent years. for those of you who think foreign policy is about trade agreements, arms treaties come arcing border disputes, let me assure you it's a lively read a stun dobson's travels across t
foreign policy questions and touched on a matter, which i know is not the appointment on the board of the european central bank, which was raised by a man by your president at the beginning of the meeting. the union's commitment to promote the equality of women and men is an objective they done in the treaty. yesterday's to buy your economic committee on the appointment is an understandable expression of concern that a great deal remains to be achieved. notably regarding the european central bank. i note also the committee's recognition that the candidates consequences are in no way disputes here for my part, last week's european council, i made a strong appeal to all heads of state of government identified and oppose female candidates at european level. the economic and financial sectors, with the other representation of women is placed. i underlined that we need to be active in encouraging this process. i hope that this such renewed commitment to gender balance, parliament would base its position on the current candidate on the sole criteria of professional qualification and expe
this country. you can choose a foreign policy that reckless and wrong or you can choose the kind of leadership that i provided, that's steady and strong. you can choose to turn back the clock 50 years for women and immigrants or in this election, you can stand up for that basic principle enshrined in our founding documents that all of us are created equal. black, white, hispanic, asian, native american, young, old, rich, poor, gay, straight, able, disabled, no matter who you are, no matter what you look like, no matter where you come from, you've got a place in america. you can make it here if you try. that's what we believe. new hampshire, we've been through tough times. but we've been through tough times before and we're tougher. we always come out on top. we always bounce back. because we pull together, because we look after one another. because we don't leave anybody behind. because when we succeed, we prop that door open and bring those who are following behind us. we pull them through. that's who we are. our destiny is not written for us. it's written by us. we don't go backward. we look
obama is, you know, he's the obviously the first and only black president he's policy an outsider in other really significant ways. he has a unusual name. he was largely grew up in foreign country. he, you know, he worked adds a community organizer with very poor people in a housing project until the south side of chicago. these are things that are extremely suspicious to lots of people in our country. and instead of talking about it doctor directly they use the other terms to code him to describe him as outer calling him a socialist. calling him a communist. these things that manifestly have nothing do with who he is. interest thing about barack obama, if you read his awe disty of hope, his memoir, if you look at the great speech the greatest moment it's about conciliation. this is what how he sees himself. this is an he did want to be a great president. he wanted to bid for greatness and by getting a grand bar iman. doing something bipartisan. he is born conciliators. that's who he is. the sad thing at the end of the day, the tragedy of barack obama is that he was a man who was
Search Results 0 to 28 of about 29 (some duplicates have been removed)

Terms of Use (10 Mar 2001)